Federal Court upholds Maryland restrictive gun law
Yeah, this is total BS. The Federal Appeals Court upheld the idiot laws in Maryland which requires that an applicant be in imminent danger to qualify for a CCW permit. The Baltimore Sun doesn’t tell the whole story;
The case began with Baltimore County resident Raymond Woollard, who sued after he was denied a permit. A national gun rights advocacy group took on the case, arguing that Maryland unnecessarily restricts the right to carry firearms.
A federal district judge agreed last March, striking down that requirement as unconstitutional.
The Maryland attorney general’s office, fearing a spike in gun violence, appealed the decision, and the federal court of appeals allowed the law to stand during the challenge.
The whole story is that Woollard had a permit after proving that he was in imminent danger from a guy who lived three miles from him and had previously forced his way into Woollard’s house. When Woollard tried to protect his family with a long gun, the intruder wrestled the gun from him, Woollard’s son got another gun and brought order to the situation until police arrived.
Because of the attack, Woollard was issued a permit. That was in 2005. Woollard renewed his permit once, but when he went back in 2009 to renew it again, the permit was denied because “his application was incomplete: “Evidence is needed to support apprehended fear (i.e. – copies of police reports for assaults, threats, harassments, stalking).””
So, Woollard sued, along with the Second Amendment Foundation. He won in the U S District Court which decided that Maryland’s restrictive regulations violated the Second Amendment;
Defendants’ application of Maryland Public Safety Code §5-306(a)(5)(ii)’s requirement that handgun carry permit applicants demonstrate “good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such . . . that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger,” violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, damaging Plaintiffs in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
But now the appellate court has overturned that decision. He had a permit for more than four years as a law-abiding citizen, but now, because his attacker is in prison, he doesn’t need one anymore. So basically, you can’t have a permit in Maryland until it’s too late.
Category: Guns
One word:
APPEAL … drive it to the Supreme Court!
I thought Massachusetts gun laws sucked…they pale next to this mess.
Hopefully they proceed with this case. It should be carried forward.
So, basically, this federal court said you must be survive an attempt on your life to be allowed to protect yourself outside your home. Definitely not in line with the constitution.
MCPO, VOV: the article says the 2nd Amendment Foundation plans to appeal.
Kind of opposite of Heller and McDonald decisions by the SCOTUS which upheld the Right of the people to bear arms.
In Heller the Court clearly decided that the right to bear arms is for all lawful purposes
McDonald further confirmed these rights extend beyond DC to the States.
The Court did say that reasonable laws could be enacted, but to me this is beyond reasonable and only seeks to restrict the right to bear arms as confirmed by the SCOTUS.
@4 Appeal, and appeal, and appeal.
It seems like the only Americans living the American Dream any more are the lawyers. The rest of us get to live the nightmare.
@ 2, the worst part of Massachusetts Laws is not even clinging to that ridiculous AWB, it is the clause in it that allows the Police Licensing Authority to simply reject or downgrade an application for a Class A CCW without any real justification. It of course can be appealed to the State Police, but that will cost you a lot…. No record, no mental health issues, have all your letters, pay all your fees and what was supposed to be a shall issue becomes non issue.
That sucks big time. My sister and brother in law live in Maryland, Cumberland, and I go turkey hunting there every season. No more, screw Maryland, no more money to that commie state, will spend my money and hunt in Ky.
This was going to SCOTUS regardless of the decision. While disappointed, I’m not surprised at the outcome, considering the empaneled judges. The fat lady ain’t sung yet.
AW1Ed I hope when you talk about that fat lady singing it’s not Sotomayor or Kagan. Just saying.
In our contemporary society, each and every one of us is ALWAYS in immediate threat of danger. There are armed felons afoot in every community across the land and we are all at risk of becoming random victims to their predations and violence.
What about that reality is it that these clueless judges can’t comprehend?
@11, Poetrooper, said “Judges” are handpicked because of their Judicial Record and political agenda, they are slaves and myrmidons to the latter.
I really know how to pick ’em! I live in Maryland now and yes, that sucks for getting a concealed carry permit, but it’s CCW heaven compared to Hawaii where I lived before MD.
In Hawaii, CCWs are “authorized,” but the only issued (at least in Honolulu County where I was a beat cop) was to the Honolulu PD armorer. No one else on the entire island had the justification to carry concealed, at least to the thinking of the HPD Chief.
Well, at least I’m getting better. Next stop: Idaho!
Well, after his attacker is paroled and kills him, he will be eligible for a carry permit. Poor SOB. As for the decision, I’ve got to read it. This sounds rather odd, especially for the conservative 4th Circuit.
@13. Keep moving West. In WV, a shall issue state, we are still free.
This is definitely a case of “better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.” His only other choice is to move. There are at least twenty other states where he won’t have this problem.
Most of Virginia is still pretty gun friendly. I’ve seen quite a bit more open carry lately, which doesn’t bother me so much. I don’t anticipate VA legislators will loose their mind anytime soon on the gun issue.